Search

Rationale, Aims, and Objectives: Valid and reliable instruments for measuring are needed. To add knowledge to the subject of tools of evidence-based practice (EBP) evaluation in mainland China, the present study aims to translate the Quick-EBP-VIK into Chinese, which is an instrument for the assessment of nurses' value, knowledge, and implementation of EBP, and to evaluate the metric characteristics of the Chinese version., Methods: In this methodological study, a total sample of 402 nurses from mainland China was applied. Construct validity was evaluated by using factor analysis and further supported through known-group validity. A panel of experts examined the content validity. Internal consistency was determined using composite reliability and Cronbach alpha. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess test-retest reliability., Results: The exploratory factor analysis revealed a three-factor structure model same to the original instrument. The confirmatory factor analysis showed a good fit model with a comparative fit index of 0.957 and a root mean square error of approximation of 0.065. Significant differences were found in the item means of the tool between nurses who received EBP training and those who had not, which supported the known-group validity. The Cronbach alpha and composite reliability for the three subscales were all higher than 0.70. The ICC ranged from 0.569 to 0.928 for the three subscales and from 0.494 to 0.903 for the items included in the instrument., Conclusion: The Chinese version of the Quick-EBP-VIK has evidence of acceptable reliability and validity and can be used to measure value, knowledge, and implementation of EBP for Chinese nurses., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Use of physical restraint in acute care psychiatry has been, and continues to be, a controversial issue. For this reason, a study was conducted in 1996 that examined nurses' decision making related to the use of physical restraint with aggressive psychiatric patients. An instrument, the Moylan Assessment of Progressive Aggression Tool (MAPAT), was developed for this purpose. Information relating to this instrument has not been previously published. It is currently in use in an ongoing research study by the author. A description of the process of the development of the MAPAT is provided here, along with the validity and reliability of the instrument, and implications for potential use in research, training, and education.

Background: In a study to establish the interrater reliability of the Irish Nursing Minimum Data Set (I-NMDS) for mental health difficulties relating to the choice of reliability test statistic were encountered., Objectives: The objective of this paper is to highlight the difficulties associated with testing interrater reliability for an ordinal scale using a relatively homogenous sample and the recommended kw statistic., Method: One pair of mental health nurses completed the I-NMDS for mental health for a total of 30 clients attending a mental health day centre over a two-week period. Data was analysed using the kw and percentage agreement statistics., Results: A total of 34 of the 38 I-NMDS for mental health variables with lower than acceptable levels of kw reliability scores achieved acceptable levels of reliability according to their percentage agreement scores., Conclusion: The study findings implied that, due to the homogeneity of the sample, low variability within the data resulted in the 'base rate problem' associated with the use of kw statistic. Conclusions point to the interpretation of kw in tandem with percentage agreement scores. Suggestions that kw scores were low due to chance agreement and that one should strive to use a study sample with known variability are queried.

This article examines different methods of assessing wound progress in order to better inform future research designs and thus produce a more credible and valid bank of knowledge. Data collected in a study of Vacutex, a capillary action dressing, were reassessed using four different mechanisms: non-blind assessment by a research nurse; two different scoring systems based on wound size and appearance; and a blind randomized assessment using initial and final images of wounds.Non-blind assessment indicated that the Vacutex dressing was superior to standard dressings by +40.8% (P=0.022); assessment by wound area and overall appearance indicated +11.2% superiority (P is not significant); and the blind randomized image-based assessment indicated a +20.6% difference (P is not significant). Assessment by wound area and description did not allow a percentage superiority to be identified and the conclusion of this method was that there was no significant difference by rank sum testing. The different assessment techniques resulted in significantly different conclusions about the effectiveness of Vacutex. On balance, the blind, randomized, image-based assessment may miss some finer nuances of wound progress but is probably the most unbiased option because those assessing the wounds are not aware of which images are taken before or after wounds have been treated.

Risk assessment scales (RASs) intended to identify patients most at risk of developing pressure ulcers have been widely used for many years. Numerous studies have evaluated their predictive validity but potential bias has been inherent in the design of all. To overcome these problems a simulation study was conducted in which clinical nurses were asked to identify the degree of risk experienced by four patients employing the three RASs discussed most frequently in the literature (Norton, Braden and Waterlow Scores). These findings were compared with nurses' clinical judgment rated on a visual analogue scale. The simulations consisted of high-resolution photographs accompanied by case studies of the patients. The nurses' scores were compared to estimates of risk generated by an expert panel. Nurses' clinical judgment agreed much more closely with expert opinion than any of the RASs. A replication study was undertaken to confirm these findings. One hundred and fifteen nurses participated in replication. Again the nurses' clinical judgment matched expert opinion much more closely than the results of the RASs. Replication also drew attention to a number of methodological issues which deserve consideration when using simulation to test the effectiveness of clinical tools and the need to establish adequate measures of external validity whenever use of this method is contemplated.

Instrument content validity is often established through qualitative expert reviews, yet quantitative analysis of reviewer agreements is also advocated in the literature. Two quantitative approaches to content validity estimations were compared and contrasted using a newly developed instrument called the Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Tool (ORAT). Data obtained from a panel of eight expert judges were analyzed. A Content Validity Index (CVI) initially determined that only one item lacked interrater proportion agreement about its relevance to the instrument as a whole (CVI = 0.57). Concern that higher proportion agreement ratings might be due to random chance stimulated further analysis using a multirater kappa coefficient of agreement. An additional seven items had low kappas, ranging from 0.29 to 0.48 and indicating poor agreement among the experts. The findings supported the elimination or revision of eight items. Pros and cons to using both proportion agreement and kappa coefficient analysis are examined.

Clinical education is critically important because competency in practice ultimately will determine the future of advanced practice nursing. Skills taught in Health Assessment, the first in a series of clinical courses, exposed students to tools that form the basis on which other competencies are built. The availability of standardized patients, people who participate in enacting a simulated but seemingly "real life" clinical encounter in a realistic clinical setting for the benefit of student learning and/or evaluation, made this instructional development project possible. The underlying assumption of this project was that clinical advanced practice nursing student education is enhanced by using an authentic clinical environment, known as a simulation center, with standardized patients and by using one or more evaluation techniques with multiple evaluators (i.e., peer, self, faculty, standardized patient). The student clinical experience was expected to improve and overall learning to increase by this method. This improvement was reflected at the end-of-course evaluations and in the quality of the final videotaped physical examination, which was superior to previous years. Student and faculty satisfaction with this teaching-learning process exceeded all expectations.

Secondary data are increasingly incorporated into nursing research studies, as nurses seek to capture and address the complexity of patient care. There is, however, little discussion in methodological literature about this type of data; the meaning is taken for granted and the data are regarded as simple sources of information, which are convenient and cost-effective. This approach denies the social meaning of the data, and is likely to lead to misinterpretation of the content. This paper discusses these analytical issues with reference to a research study which used secondary data (nursing care plans) in an examination of the ways in which nurses assess their patients. Using this data led to an increased understanding of the social world in which assessment took place.